Palm oil-related CSR: The effect of message framing and
palm oil knowledge on company evaluation
University of Amsterdam
Graduate School of Communication Corporate Communication
Master Thesis
Name: Frédérique van Gijn Student number: 11189428
Supervisor: Dr. Suzanne de Bakker June 30, 2017
2 Abstract
Palm oil is the most used vegetable oil in the world. However, it is related to a number of problems. Additionally, consumers mainly have negative associations with palm oil and little profound knowledge of the related issues. This study aims to examine how consumers
evaluate a company, depending on the type of palm oil-related CSR message frame they are confronted with, and how knowledge of the palm oil issue affects this relationship. An online experiment in the specific context of the palm oil issue measured consumers' company
evaluations after being confronted with a CSR message frame by this company, and examined how knowledge of the palm oil issue moderates the relationship. Although no significant results were found, this research could mean a starting point for CSR and consumer-related research in the context of the palm oil issue.
3 Introduction
Nowadays, the majority of the products that are being sold in the supermarket, are made with palm oil. Palm oil is mostly used as a raw material in food and non-food products, such as bread, pastries, ice cream, margarines, beauty care products, cosmetics, candles, and
detergents ("Palm oil uses", n.d.). Palm oil production has increased from 15.2 million ton in 1995, to 62.2 million ton in 2015 worldwide ("Palm oil production", n.d.). Currently, it is the most used vegetable oil in the world ("Consumption of vegetable oils worldwide", n.d.). The two largest producers of palm oil, Malaysia and Indonesia, exported about 40 million tonnes of palm oil in 2013, which equals a western import price of more than 30 billion dollars (Europe economics, 2014). In 2012, the European Union imported almost 5.4 billion euros worth of palm oil (Europe economics, 2014). Due to the rapid increase of palm oil production, plantations are spreading across Africa, Asia and Latin America. This however, comes at the expense of tropical rainforests, that are being converted into illegal palm oil plantations, and negatively impacts a large number of plant and animal species ("5-minute info – palm oil", n.d.;RSPO, n.d.).
The use of palm oil that comes from sources that are certified by the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), is a sustainable alternative for the use of palm oil from illegal plantations (RSPO, n.d.). The RSPO is a non-profit platform of organizations in the palm oil industry that promote the use of sustainable palm oil, and an important sustainability standard that is used worldwide (RSPO, n.d.). Companies that provide a large part of the consumer goods that contain palm oil, are increasingly using sustainable RSPO-certified palm oil. However, currently only 21 percent of the palm oil production worldwide is RSPO-certified (RSPO, n.d). This means that the majority of the products are still being produced with non-sustainable palm oil.
Research on the subject indicates that consumers generally have little profound knowledge of the palm oil issue (Disdier, Marette, & Millet, 2013). However, the same study by Disdier et al. (2013) demonstrates that consumers mostly have negative associations with palm oil and are concerned about the issue. Additionally, the fact that more than half of the products in the supermarkets contain or are produced with palm oil ("Palm oil uses", n.d.), implies that every consumer buys and uses at least some of these products regularly. Augur, Burke, Devinney, and Louviere (2003) argue that consumers have little knowledge of the ethicalness of the products they buy. Despite their concerns, consumers have little knowledge of the palm oil issue, and of the ethicalness of the products they buy. Therefore they might not
4
be aware of the fact that many of the products they consume contain palm oil at all, let alone whether the palm oil comes from a sustainable source or not.
Products that are produced with sustainable palm oil can already be provided with an RSPO-label. The RSPO-label helps consumers see which products contain sustainable palm oil (Stevenson, n.d.). Despite the good cause of the RSPO, only 10 percent of the palm oil production is certified (WWF in RSPO, n.d.).Additionally, regarding various companies there is a communication gap between what they do (use sustainable palm oil) and how visible they are about this in their communication (Alva group, 2016).The reason for this remains unclear.
Aside from the option of an RSPO-label for sustainable palm oil, a rising number of products has been provided with a 'no palm oil' label (Brussels, 2016). However, the use of palm oil on its own is not a bad thing per se. The problem concerns the illegal deforestation that only came with the large scale use of palm oil ("5-minute info – palm oil", n.d.;
"Impacts", n.d.). Namely, palm oil has advantages: compared to other vegetable oils, it needs less surface to be produced ("Palm oil and deforestation", 2015). This means that switching to another vegetable oil, such as soy bean or sunflower oil, will not solve the current problem, but will most likely create new, similar problems. Hence, the fact that a product contains palm oil is not bad on its own, as long as the palm oil comes from a sustainable source. In that sense, the use of sustainable palm oil is likely to be the most responsible and sustainable option. However, given the negative attention palm oil has received in the media (Paoli et al., 2010), and the negative associations consumers generally have with the subject (Disdier et al., 2013), consumers might not be aware of the difference between sustainable and
non-sustainable palm oil, and of other factors surrounding the palm oil issue. In 2010,
multinational Nestlé's brand Kit Kat negative became the subject of a negative media-attack campaign by Greenpeace, for purchasing palm oil from one of the main 'rainforest and peatland-destroying suppliers' in Indonesia (Greenpeace, 2011). According to Greenpeace (2011), by using social media attacks and online campaigning videos that went viral, the campaign caused Nestlé to agree to stop purchasing non-sustainable palm oil. The Nestlé case demonstrates how negative media attention with regard to the palm oil issue, could possibly lead to a bad company reputation and evaluation.
The use of sustainable palm oil by companies is considered a Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) activity. CSR has been defined as "a commitment to improve (societal) well-being through discretionary business practices and contributions of corporate resources" (Du, Bhattacharya, & Sen, 2010, p.8). CSR can focus on a company's economic, legal,
5
ethical, and philanthropic responsibility (Lee & Carroll, 2011). Good sustainability ratings, which could for instance be gained from the use of sustainable palm oil, are important for companies, as they have shown to positively affect consumers' evaluation of the company and their perception of the company's motives for CSR as intrinsic (Parguel, Benoît-Moreau, & Larceneux, 2011). As consumers are often unaware of companies' CSR activities (Karaosman, Morales-Alonso, & Grijalvo, 2015), and have little knowledge of the palm oil issue (Disdier et al., 2013), they might not realize which companies use sustainable, RSPO-certified, palm oil in their products. If this is the case, the benefits that companies intend to gain from CSR could be undermined completely by consumers' lack of knowledge or awareness.
Not only the CSR itself, but also the way it is perceived has been studied.Lee and Carroll (2011) stress the importance for companies to be open to the public about their CSR activities, as they need to keep up with changing public opinions and prevent negative opinion pieces in the media. Namely, CSR campaigns may positively influence the public's opinion (Pfau, Haigh, Sims, & Wigley, 2008). Furthermore, companies also need to understand the factors of their company and of consumers that might impact the effectiveness of CSR communication (Du et al., 2010). For example, consumers' overall attitude towards a
company and their beliefs in its CSR can influence their intention to buy a company's product (Sparks, Perkins, & Buckley, 2013). According to Marin & Ruiz (2007), CSR activities can also directly impact a company's attractiveness and its perceived reputation (Walker & Kent, 2009). Additionally, associations that consumers have with a company's CSR can affect the way they evaluate its products (Brown & Dacin, 1997). Brown and Dacin (1997) found that the effect of CSR on product evaluation takes place through the overall evaluation of the company. The evaluation of a company concerns the way consumers perceive certain aspects of a company, that together make up a prestigious corporate identity (Bhattacharya et al., 1995;Marin & Ruiz, 2007). CSR campaigns have furthermore shown to positively affect the way consumers evaluate the company (Sen & Batthacharya, 2001).
It is important to find out more about the way consumer attitudes towards a company are affected by its CSR messages. So far, results of research that studied CSR effects have not been completely congruent. Namely, where several CSR attempts by companies have shown to pay off (Lee & Carroll, 2011), other studies failed to find any positive effects on consumer attitudes (Pawlak & Zasuwa, 2011). A possible explanation for these contradictory findings is the fact that most research studied CSR in a rather broad context. This research will attempt to clarify these incongruent results, by studying the way consumer attitudes can be influenced by a company CSR message, in the specific context of the palm oil issue, and by using realistic
6
materials. It is interesting to see which effects CSR messages concerning the use of
sustainable palm oil will have on consumers' evaluation of a company. The outcomes could help all companies create more effective CSR messages that generate positive consumer evaluations. Yet, they could specifically help companies in the palm oil industry to create their CSR messages in the most adequate manner. Considering the current controversy with regard to the palm oil industry, this is essential. Additionally, few is known about the palm oil issue in the context of CSR in relation to consumers (Disdier et al., 2013).Therefore, the current study will specifically focus on the way a company's palm oil-related CSR message frame affects consumer evaluation of a company.
As CSR is a communicated event, companies should approach CSR as communication itself, and not treat it merely as a means (Schultz, Castello, & Morsing, 2013). When it comes to their CSR communication, companies determine which CSR elements to emphasize in their CSR messages (Du et al., 2010). Moreover, depending on the elements that are being
emphasized in a CSR message, the message can take on a different tone (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001). A theory that focuses on the fact that every issue has different ways of approaching it, and will be perceived differently, is framing theory (Chong & Druckman, 2007). Framing theory has played a large role in communication science generally, although it has mostly been applied to areas like political communication and journalism. However, despite an increased amount of studies that apply framing theory to CSR communication, these studies are often performed in the context of news media (Lunenberg, Gosselt, & De Jong, 2016; Verhoeven, 2016). Nonetheless, the emphasis of elements or choice of a certain tone in CSR messages by companies, as opposed to CSR reports by news media, demonstrate similarities with framing theory as well. Therefore, it would be interesting to apply framing theory to CSR messages by companies. Additionally, framing effects in CSR can have different effects on consumers in different industries (Steltenpool & Verhoeven, 2015). This means that framing effects that have been found so far, might not apply to the palm oil industry. Hence, the current study could shed more light on framing effects in the palm oil industry.
Furthermore, consumer characteristics might play a role in their evaluation of a company. A recent study shows that consumers are often unaware of companies' CSR activities (Karaosman, Morales-Alonso, & Grijalvo, 2015). Yet, a study from 2001 indicated that consumers wish to know more about companies' CSR (Mohr, Webb & Harris, 2001). Assuming this is still the case in 2017, there is a need for companies need to communicate about their CSR more effectively to its stakeholders (Du, et. al, 2010). Moreover, research suggests that there are various benefits for a company related to consumers' knowledge of its
7
CSR activities (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). Many studies that include the concept of CSR knowledge or awareness, focus on the relationship with purchase intention. However, few have linked it to company evaluation. Although some studies have looked into the direct relationship between knowledge of a social issue and variations of company evaluation or of the CSR strategy itself, CSR research that includes knowledge as a moderator is hard to find. However, whether consumers have existing knowledge of the subject of the CSR message, in this case knowledge of the palm oil issue, when being confronted with the message, might affect the way they perceive the message and the way it affects them. For example, consumers with more knowledge of the palm oil issue might be more critical and less susceptible to the message, than those with very little knowledge. This study will therefore include knowledge of the palm oil issue as a moderator, to see whether evaluation of the company after being confronted with a palm oil-related CSR message, is different for consumers that have knowledge of the palm oil issue from those that do not.
In addition to the effects of palm oil plantations on tropical rainforests and animal species, an important aspect of the palm oil issue has to do with the negative media attention the palm oil industry has received (Paoli et al., 2010). Furthermore, there seems to be a communication gap with regard to the companies that are doing good, concerning their use of sustainable palm oil, but are not open and visible about it (Alva group, 2016). Considering consumers' low knowledge of, and concern for the palm oil issue (Disdier et al., 2013), and their low knowledge of the ethicalness of their purchases (Augur et al., 2003), they are possibly unaware of the difference between 'good' sustainable palm oil, and 'bad' palm oil. Therefore, companies are likely to benefit from communicating their CSR activities concerning their use of sustainable palm oil more openly. Hence, the main question that is posed in this research is as follows:
RQ1: How do consumers evaluate a company, depending on the type of palm oil-related CSR message frame they are confronted with, and how does knowledge of the palm oil issue affect this relationship?
Theoretical Framework
This chapter will discuss the theory that is relevant for the current study. First, further
information will be given on the palm oil issue and on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Then, the concept of company evaluation will be discussed. Third, we discuss the concepts of
8
CSR messages and framing theory, as well as their relation to each other. Lastly, the concept of knowledge will be treated.
Context - the palm oil issue
Despite the good qualities of palm oil, such as its good cooking properties and its efficient growth (RSPO, n.d.), palm oil has been associated with certain problems, which together will be referred to as the palm oil issue. These problems, according to Tan, Mohamed, and Bhatia (2009), include deforestation and orangutan extinction. The authors explain that by deforestation, in this case, is meant that areas of tropical forests are being converted to oil palm plantations. For instance, in Indonesia three million hectares of tropical rainforest has been converted into oil palm plantations. Among the consequences of this deforestation is the fact that various animal species, such as Asian elephants, Sumatran tigers and Sumatran rhinos, are facing extinction as their natural habitat is being destroyed. Another animal species that is being threatened by deforestation is the orangutan. An article by U.K.'s daily mail reported the alleged death of hundreds of orangutans caused by fires that were deliberately lit by palm oil companies (Shears, 2012). Mainly on the Indonesian islands of Borneo and Sumatra, orangutans suffer from the expansion of oil palm plantations. From there come reports of orangutans being killed, when wandering onto plantations while looking for food (Tan et al., 2009).
With the aim to find a solution to this problem, the WWF brought together all parties involved in the production of palm oil and founded the RSPO in 2004 (WWF in RSPO, n.d.). Nowadays, the RSPO has more than 500 members that work together to make palm oil more sustainable and together produce more than half of the palm oil worldwide (RSPO, n.d.). The RSPO developed a certification system for sustainable palm oil, which secures fair working conditions, the protection of local people's lands, the prevention of deforestation, and wildlife conservation (WWF in RSPO, n.d.).
CSR
Numerous definitions of CSR have been used in CSR-related research throughout the years. However, most of the available definitions consistently refer to the same elements of CSR, making the lack of an all encompassing definition non problematic (Dahlsrud, 2008). In this research two CSR definitions by Du et al. (2010, p.8) and Falck and Heblich (2007, p. 247) are combined, defining CSR more comprehensively as: "a voluntary corporate commitment to improve (societal) well-being through unrestricted business practices and contributions of corporate resources, that exceed explicit and implicit obligations imposed on
9
a company".
CSR can be divided into different dimensions. Carroll (1991; Lee & Carroll, 2011) developed a pyramid concerning a company's economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibility. In this pyramid, a company's economic responsibility is the foundation upon which the other dimensions are built. It relates to the statement that a business should be profitable. Next comes a company's legal responsibility, which is to obey the law, followed by the ethical responsibility that requires a company to behave morally right. Topping the
pyramid is the philanthropic responsibility to be a good corporate citizen by contributing to the community (Lee & Carroll, 2011).
Carroll's method of describing CSR is all-encompassing and has been applied widely in CSR research (Lee & Carroll, 2011). Within this method, the use of sustainable palm oil should be considered part of a company's ethical responsibility as it concerns doing the right thing morally and avoiding harm (Lee & Carroll, 2011). For this particular issue, the avoided harm is that to nature, by choosing to avoid large scale deforestation and use palm oil that is produced sustainably. Moreover, although there (currently) is no law that binds companies to choose sustainable palm oil, in western society this would be considered more ethical than destroying nature.
CSR message frames
According to Du et al. (2010) companies need to have a deeper understanding of what to communicate when it comes to their CSR communication. Considering the problems that are associated with the palm oil issue, the subject may be a delicate matter for companies to communicate about externally. Therefore, companies should carefully decide in which manner to convey their CSR message that concerns their use of sustainable palm oil. More specifically, companies choose to emphasize certain aspects of their messages and focus on aspects like why and for which purpose they use palm oil, and whether it is certified. Du et al. (2010) argue that CSR messages should explain a company's commitment to the CSR cause, its motives for involvement, the impact or benefits of the CSR activities, and the fit between the CSR cause and the company's business. They further state that companies have to decide which of these aspects should be emphasized in their CSR messages (Du et al, 2010).By emphasizing certain aspects, CSR messages about the same subject, can take on a different tone (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001).
Emphasizing certain aspects of a media message is an important aspect of framing theory (Entman, 1991). Framing refers to the way information is presented to "resonate with"
10
the audience's "existing underlying schema's" (Shoemaker & Reese, 1996 in Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007, p. 12). In the last few years, framing theory has increasingly been applied to studies in CSR communication, although often with a focus on news media(Steltenpool & Verhoeven, 2012; Garcia & Greenwood, 2015; Lunenberg et al. 2016; Verhoeven, 2016), rather than on CSR messages by companies. However, there is no one core framing theory that is widely accepted (Hertog & McLeod, 2001). The premise of framing theory is that an issue can be approached from various perspectives, and perceived in different manners (Chong & Druckman, 2007). Framing can concern text or image. Frames arise from giving more or less importance to, or emphasizing, certain factors, such as using or repeating certain words, metaphors, symbols and visuals in a narrative (Entman, 1991).
I argue that frames arise from companies decisions to emphasize certain aspects in their CSR messages, and companies thus choose which frame to apply to their messages. Therefore, the current study will consider all literature concerning the practice of emphasizing aspects in CSR messages as part of the literature on framing CSR messages. This research will focus on frames in CSR messages and the effects on consumers.
As there is no core framing theory, framing research has not developed a generalizable set of frames to be built upon, and scholars tend to generate unique frames in every research that studies framing in a certain social phenomenon (Hertog & McLeod, 2001). There are different types of frames at different levels of abstraction, such as issue-specific or generic frames (Matthes, 2009). The so-called issue-specific frames are dependent on the
phenomenon that is being studied (Hertog & McLeod, 2001). Therefore different possible frames can be applied to different issues (Matthes, 2009). For instance, Garcia and
Greenwood (2015) studied frames that equaled several CSR categories, such as ethical
behaviors, legal behaviors, philanthropic activity, and financial sustainability. Generic frames on the other hand are not bound to certain issues. Due to their more abstract nature they can be found in various phenomena (Matthes, 2009). Examples of generic frames are negative versus positive frames, episodic versus thematic frames (Waller & Conaway, 2011), and rationally versus emotionally framed messages (Andreu, Casado-Díaz, & Mattila, 2015).
An emotional message focuses on intangible, emotional and subjective elements of the subject (Liu & Stout, 1987) and intends to make consumers feel good (Albers- Miller & Stafford, 1999, in Andreu et al., 2015). On the other hand, a rational message contains straightforwardly presented, objective information, and facts (Stafford & Day, 1995 in Andreu et al., 2015). Rationally framed messages may contain more information on
11
targets consumers' emotions, and a combination of the two contains both emotional and rational elements (Buden & Connett, 2016). For instance, an emotional CSR message about palm oil could focus on its contribution to a good flavor and the 'beautiful countries' it originates from, whereas a rational message could emphasize a company's use of sustainable palm oil and (RSPO) certifications. Andreu et al. (2015) found that rational CSR messages communicate environment-related CSR, as concerns the palm oil issue, more effectively than emotionally framed messages do. According to the authors, this was due to the fact that consumers' cognitive involvement in companies' environmental issues is higher, as
environmental issues directly affect consumers (as opposed to issues like employee welfare). High cognitive involvement resulted in a more effectively communicated rational (factual) CSR message, whereas low cognitive involvement would benefit from an emotional appeal, to still effectively communicate the CSR message (Andreu et al., 2015). Although Buden & Connett (2016) also found consumers to react better to a rational message than to an
emotional message when it came to their purchase intention, their trust was highest after being confronted with a message that contained both emotional and rational elements. The currents study will focus on rational, emotional, and combined (rational and emotional) palm oil-related CSR message frames.
Companies' CSR messages can merely discuss a social issue itself (Friestad & Wright, 1994), or mainly explain its involvement in the issue (Menon & Kahn, 2003). Usually,
companies' CSR messages focus on its involvement in a certain cause, rather than only on the CSR issue itself (Du et al, 2010). A message that only discusses the social issue itself would, for instance, merely explain the problems and issues surrounding the palm oil industry, whereas a message focusing on the company's involvement in palm oil would explain what the company is doing to make a positive contribution to the problematic situation regarding palm oil.
Company evaluation
Company evaluation is defined as "the degree of positiveness or negativeness of the subject's global judgment of the company" (Marin & Ruiz, 2007, p. 249). It is based on a few key characteristics that make up a company's prestigious identity (Bhattacharya et al., 1995in Marin & Ruiz, 2007). The concept of a company evaluation includes how consumers perceive a company's reputation, financial stability, long run orientation, whether it is well established, its sustainability and the degree to which consumers trust it (Marin & Ruiz, 2007). Hence, consumers evaluate a company based on these factors. The CSR communication of a
12
company can affect consumers' evaluation of the company. For example, consumers become more suspicious of companies' ulterior motives to persuade them following a CSR message that merely discusses a social issue itself (Friestad & Wright, 1994), as opposed to messages that explain a company's involvement in the social issue (Menon & Kahn, 2003). Consumers' suspiciousness of ulterior company motives could also be seen as a form of them negatively evaluating the company.
Companies generally strive for positive evaluations. Considering the negative media attention the industry received (Paoli et al., 2010), and the negative associations consumers have with palm oil (Disdier, et al. 2013), the goal of palm oil-related CSR communication is to generate positive company evaluations among consumers. Hence, consumers' evaluation of the company is important for companies in the palm oil industry.
Consumers' associations with a company's CSR can affect their evaluation of the company and its products (Brown & Dacin, 1997), and the chosen CSR strategy contributes to the way consumers evaluate the CSR campaign (Kim, 2014). Moreover, CSR campaigns can positively affect the way consumers evaluate a company (Sen & Batthacharya, 2001), and if companies have a positive image to begin with, CSR campaigns can even make people's perception of the company better with regard to its image, reputation, and credibility (Pfau et al., 2008). Yoon, Gürhan-Canli, & Schwarz (2006) argue that there are differences in the way consumers that are confronted with a company's CSR and consumers that are not evaluate a company. When consumers perceive a company to be sincere in their CSR motives, they evaluate it more positively after being confronted with its CSR, than when they are not confronted with its CSR (Yoon et al., 2006). Hence, research generally demonstrates a positive effect of confrontation with a company's CSR, compared to not being confronted with any CSR, on consumers' evaluation of the company. When it comes to CSR messages in the context of the palm oil issue, we expect consumers' company evaluation to be affected by confrontation with a palm oil-related CSR message in a similar manner. Thus, we expect consumers' company evaluation to be more positive after confrontation with palm oil-related CSR, than without confrontation with any CSR message.
H1: Consumers evaluate a company more positively after being confronted with a CSR message by this company concerning its Palm oil-related CSR activities, than when not being confronted with any CSR message.
Framing effects
13
people's frames and attitudes (Chong & Druckman, 2007). Framing effects concern the influence of the way an issue is framed, on people's opinions (Chong & Druckman, 2007). The way CSR messages are framed can affect consumers differently, depending on the industry (Steltenpool & Verhoeven, 2015).
Even though rational messages have shown to affect consumers' purchase intention more positively than emotional messages, consumers evaluated a combined rational and emotional company message as most trustworthy after being confronted with it (Buden & Connett, 2016). As consumers' trust is considered as an aspect of company evaluation (Marin & Ruiz, 2007), the effects on consumers' trust in the company are expected to be closely related to the effects on consumers' company evaluation. Additionally, as explained , this study considers message types to be closely related to message frames. Therefore, we follow Buden & Connett's (2016) findings, and expect a palm oil-related CSR message that is framed with both rational and emotional elements, to affect consumers' company evaluation in the same matter as it affected trust. Thus, the combined message frame will affect their company evaluation most positively, when compared to a mere rational or mere emotional CSR
message frame. Hence, hypothesis 2 is conducted as follows:
H2: Consumers evaluate a company most positively after being confronted with a CSR message by this company, concerning the palm oil issue that is framed both rationally and emotionally (combined).
As CSR message frames have different effects on consumers in different industries (Steltenpool & Verhoeven, 2015), framing effects found in other studies could possibly not apply to the palm oil industry. When only distinguishing between rational and emotional CSR messages, rational CSR messages have shown to communicate environment-related CSR, as is the palm oil issue, more effectively than emotional frames do (Andreu et al., 2015). This, according to Andreu et al. (2015) was due to consumers' higher involvement in the issue. Additionally, research indicates that consumer's opinions can be affected by the frame in which information is presented to them (Chong & Druckman, 2007). As the current study focuses on CSR messages concerning the palm oil issue; an environment-related issue, rational messages are expected to communicate CSR that is related to the palm oil issue more effectively than emotional messages do. In the context of the discussed theory, an effectively communicated CSR message would generate positive company evaluations by consumers. Following the findings of Andreu et al. (2015), hypothesis 3 was conducted:
14
H3: Consumers evaluate a company more positively after being confronted with only a rationally framed CSR message by this company that concerns the palm oil issue, than after being confronted with only an emotionally framed CSR message by this company, concerning the palm oil issue.
Knowledge
Previous research suggests that consumers often have little knowledge of companies' CSR activities (Mohr, Webb & Harris, 2001; Karaosman, Morales-Alonso, & Grijalvo, 2015), although in the past, a number of consumers desired to know more about companies' CSR records (Mohr, et al., 2001). However, consumers' knowledge concerning companies' CSR activities has shown to have various benefits for companies: When consumers are more aware of a company's CSR activities, they will generally respond more positively to those activities (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). Furthermore, knowledge of a CSR issue has often led to greater support of the issue by consumers (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). In 2003, Augur et al. found that consumers also had little knowledge about the ethicalness of the products they purchase. The consumers that do base their purchases on a company's CSR, generally possess more knowledge concerning CSR issues than the ones that do not base their purchases on ethicalness (Mohr et al., 2001).
Not only do consumers have little knowledge of companies' CSR, a study on the palm oil issue indicated that consumers also have little profound knowledge on the palm oil issue itself (Disdier et al., 2013). This study by Disdier et al. (2013) revealed that although 85 percent of the respondents had heard about palm oil, 62 percent of them had a negative association with the subject. These outcomes of Disdier et al. (2013) indicate that the little knowledge that consumers have about the subject, is mostly negative. This illustrates the importance of effective CSR for companies operating in the palm oil industry. That way consumers can obtain a reliable perception of the palm oil issue, and not just associate it with the related problems.
As most of these findings concerning CSR knowledge among consumers are older, the question is whether they still apply in 2017. Therefore it is interesting to see whether these beliefs concerning the subject still hold up today. As knowledge of the CSR subject has shown to be able to play a role in the way consumers evaluate CSR activities themselves, this might be the same for the evaluation of the company that performs the CSR activities.
Therefore, we expect consumers' knowledge to play a role in the way their evaluation of the company might be affected by the CSR message they are confronted with. Prior knowledge of
15
the palm oil issue might affect the way consumers perceive a CSR message because they already have a broader idea of the issue, compared to consumers that are confronted with a company's CSR without prejudice. Consumers could, for example, be less susceptible to, or more critical towards, the information in the CSR message. Consequently, we expect the relationship between the type of message and consumers' evaluation of a company to be moderated by consumers' knowledge of the CSR issue. Hence:
H4a:Knowledge of the palm oil issue moderates the relationship between the palm oil-related CSR message frame and consumers' evaluation of the company as given in H2 and H3, in such manner that the company evaluation of consumers with more knowledge of the palm oil issue, is affected less by the message frame they are confronted with.
H4b: Reversely, the company evaluation of consumers with less knowledge of the palm oil issue, is affected more by the message frame they are confronted with.
This study focuses on the type of CSR message that explains a company's involvement in a social issue, and put aside CSR messages that merely discuss the social issue itself. Namely, a CSR message that explains a company's involvement in the social issue, would be a better choice for companies, as consumer reactions to these types of messages are less negative (Friestad & Wright, 1994; Menon & Kahn, 2003).
Emerging from the theory discussed in this chapter and the conducted hypotheses, the following corresponding conceptual model (Figure 1) was constructed to represent the hypotheses:
H1
H2&H3
H4
Figure 1: Conceptual model with hypotheses
Palm oil-CSR message frame
Knowledge of the palm oil
issue
Company evaluation CSR message/
16 Method
The purpose of this study was to determine the way consumers evaluate a company,
depending on the Palm oil-related message frame they are confronted with. As well as to learn more about the moderating effect of knowledge of the CSR issue (palm oil) on this
relationship. Research design
A 3x1 experimental design was conducted. With the online survey tool Qualtrics, respondents were randomly assigned to either the control group or to one of the three experimental conditions: a rationally framed palm oil-related CSR message, an emotionally framed palm oil-related CSR message, or a palm oil-related CSR message containing both rational and emotional elements. A convenience sample of consumers of sixteen and older was targeted by inviting respondents via the researcher's personal network, using social media and by face-to-face contact. As respondents were asked to spread the link to the survey in their own network, a snowball sampling method was used.
The company that was used as an example in this research was Nutella (Ferrero). The choice for Nutella was justified for three reasons: First, the product contains palm oil. Second, the company and product are known worldwide, and third, Nutella communicates about palm oil on their corporate website. Additionally, the company has not been targeted in a large scale attack campaign, and is not very known for its use of palm oil.
To make the palm oil-CSR message as realistic as possible, Nutella's CSR text on their corporate web page was used in this experiment. The original pictures were removed to rule out their possible influence on the outcomes. The original text was used without editing for the combined rationally and emotionally framed message (appendix B3), as it contained both elements. The rational and the emotional message were manipulated to fit the experimental condition.
In the emotionally framed message (appendix B1) only those elements of the text were included that would appeal to the respondents emotionally. In this message the rational and factual elements were excluded. An emotional appeal "stresses the intangible, emotional, and objectively unverifiable aspects of the product presented in the message" (Liu & Stout, 1987, p. 174). Furthermore, by focusing on the emotional aspect, it intends to "make the consumer feel good about the product, by creating a likeable or friendly brand "(Albers- Miller & Stafford, 1999, in Andreu et al., 2015, p. 1489).
17
The rationally framed message (appendix B2) was manipulated reversely, so that it was likely to appeal to the respondents rationally. In the rationally framed message the emotional aspects were excluded. Rational appeals contain facts and present them in an objective and straightforward manner (Stafford & Day, 1995 in Andreu et al., 2015). Additionally, they "emphasize the tangible, logical and objectively verifiable facts" (Liu & Stout, 1987, p. 174).
Directly after exposing the respondent to the message, a manipulation check was performed. The manipulation check tests whether the respondents perceive the message the way it was intended. This meant verifying whether the respondent perceived the message to be emotional, rational, or a combination of the two. The details about the manipulation check can be found in this chapter under 'measures'.
The control group was not confronted with any CSR message. Rather than seeing a page with a CSR message, they were shown a page with the text: 'The survey will continue on the next page' (appendix B4). Accordingly, the control group did not answer a
manipulation check. The remaining part of the survey was equal for all participants. The statistics program IBM SPSS Statistics was used for analyzing the data and running the statistical tests.
Procedure
Over the course of one week, respondents were actively invited to participate in the online survey (appendix A). Participants could fill out the survey on any device with internet. In order to increase the response rate, people were also approached personally by the
researcher and by the respondents that recruited them.
Once the participants opened the link, they were welcomed by a message from the researcher and had to agree to the use of the survey data for this study. On the next page, the participant was confronted with one of the three palm oil-CSR messages or with the message that the survey would continue on the next page. The respondents that were confronted with one of the CSR messages about palm oil, were directly afterwards asked to rate the message concerning how emotional or rational it was. On the next page the questions started. Each respondent filled out the same questions, in order to measure their evaluation of the company and their knowledge of the palm oil issue. In that order the variables were measured, each on a new page. The next page contained questions about personal information, such as gender, age, and nationality. The final page contained a message that the survey had finished and a send button.
18 Measures
Manipilation check: The manipulation check asked participants to respond to the statement: 'I find the message...' using three seven point-scale response formats: one from logical to emotional, one from objective to subjective, and one from factual to non factual, by example of Liu and Stout (1987). All scales used in this research were tested with a principal component analysis (PCA), a type of factor analysis. The PCA was conducted in order to test if the three items together represented a single unidemensional scale. In all of the three conditions only one item exceeded an eigenvalue of 1. This was the case for the emotional condition (eigenvalue 1.77), the rational condition (eigenvalue 1.85), and the combined
condition (eigenvalue 2.03). All items correlated positively with the first component. The item 'I find the item factual - non factual' has the strongest correlation in the emotional condition (factor loading is .83) and the rational condition (factor loading is .88), and 'I find the item logical -emotional' in the combined condition (factor loading is .86). There also was a clear point of inflexion in the scree plot after the strongest correlating component in each condition. Next, a reliability check was performed. The scales of the manipulation check for the
emotionally framed message (α=.63) and for the rationally framed message (α=.68) were satisfactory, and the scale of the combined message frame was reliable (α=.76).
To measure whether the manipulation was successful, a one- way ANOVA was conducted to compare the CSR message frame (emotional /rational/combined) with the way the participants rated the message in the manipulation check (from rational to emotional). Even though the 'emotional group' rated the message slightly more emotional (M=3.75, SD=1.19), the 'rational group' rated the message slightly more rational (M=3.60, SD=1.29), and the 'combined group' on average rated it in between the two (M=3.65, SD=1.51), the differences between these groups were not significant (F(2,146)=.19, p=.83). This means the manipulation was unsuccessful. Additionally, a Chi-square test was conducted with the same variables. However, the results were not significant (2(36) = 47.26, p =.1, N=212). This indicates participants were not aware of the nature of the CSR-message they were confronted with, and did not recognize it as being rational, emotional or combined.
Dependent variable: Company evaluation, defined as "the degree of positiveness or negativeness of the subject's global judgment of the company" (Marin & Ruiz, 2007, p. 249), was measured with a scale by Marin & Ruiz (2007). Respondents were asked to what extent they agreed with six statements, such as: 'Nutella is an organization with a good reputation', 'Nutella is a financially stable organization', and 'Nutella is an organization I trust', using a sevenpoint-scale response format that ranged from 1('I strongly disagree') to 7 ('I strongly
19
agree'). To measure whether the items together represent one unidimensional scale for company evaluation, a factor analysis was performed. The PCA analysis indicated that of the six items, two components had an eigenvalue above 1. The initial eigenvalues indicated that one component explained 43.30 percent of the variance (eigenvalue=2.60) and the second component explained 17.25 percent of the variance (eigenvalue=1.04). However, there was a clear point of inflexion in the scree plot after the first component, and all items correlated positively with this component. 'Nutella is an organization with a good reputation' (factor loading .76) has the strongest correlation. The second component had both positive and negative correlations. The strongest correlating item was 'Nutella is a financially stable organization' (factor loading .55). As the scale had been used to measure company evaluation in past research (Marin & Ruiz, 2007), it was tested for reliability. The scale for company evaluation was reliable (α=.74) and therefore used in the current research.
Moderating variable: With regard to the concept of knowledge, the choice was made to measure self-assessed or subjective knowledge, rather than actual knowledge of the palm oil issue, defining knowledge as: 'the knowledge people perceive themselves to have on the palm oil issue'. The choice for measuring knowledge this way, was made due to limited time and resources for creating a new instrument to measure actual knowledge of the palm oil issue, which is not available yet. Self-assessed knowledge was measured through nine questions with a seven point scale response format, ranging from 'I strongly disagree' to 'I strongly agree', by Flynn and Goldsmith (1999). The questions were, for example: 'I know pretty much about the palm oil issue', and 'I can tell if a product contains sustainable palm oil or non-sustainable palm oil'. First, some items had to be recoded as they had reversed
answering scores. A PCA analysis indicated that the items together formed a single
unidimensional scale, as only one component had an eigenvalue above 1(eigenvalue=4.67). All items correlated positively to the first component, the item 'When it comes to the palm oil issues I really don't know a lot ' had the strongest association (factor loading was .84). The item ' I do not feel very knowledgeable about the palm oil issue' was deleted to improve the reliability of the scale (α=.90). After the all scales were tested for reliability, they were combined into one variable per construct.
Sample
The participants ages ranged from 17 to 73 (Mage= 34.5, SD=11.60). From the
original sample 96 unfinished questionnaires had to be removed. Of the final sample (N=212), 68.9 percent was female and 31.1 percent was male. Furthermore, 69.8 percent of the
20
respondents was Dutch and the remaining 30.2 percent were natives of 22 different countries. Table 1 displays the distribution of the sample over the experimental conditions.
Table 1
Distribution sample experimental conditions
Condition Palm oil-CSR message N
Condition 1 Emotional message 54
Condition 2 Rational message 47
Condition 3 Combined message 48
Condition 4 Control group 63
note: N=212
Results
Hypothesis 1
In order to measure whether the company evaluation of consumers that were
confronted with a palm oil-related CSR message was more positively than the evaluation of consumers that were not confronted with any message (H1), a t-test was performed to compare the two conditions. Company evaluation was measured with a 7-point Likert scale, from 1 (extremely negative) to 7 (extremely positive). There was no significant difference found between the group that was confronted with a CSR message (M=5.27, SD=.85) and the control group that was not (M=5.21, SD=.70), t(115)=-.52, p=.42. This result suggest that whether or not consumers are confronted with a CSR message or not, does not affect the way they evaluate a company.
Additional t-tests were performed to test whether there was a difference in company evaluation between the control group and the three experimental groups separately. Company evaluation was measured using the same 7-point Likert scale. The outcomes did not show a significant difference between the control group (M=5.21, SD=.70) and the group that was confronted with an emotionally framed message (M=5.32, SD=.80), t(210)=-.81, p=.63. Neither was there a significant difference found between the control group (M=5.21, SD=.70) and the group that was confronted with a rationally framed message (M=5.24, SD=.84), t(108)=-.20, p=.84. Furthermore, the difference between the control group (M=5.21, SD=.70) and the group that was confronted with the combined emotional and rational message
21
consumers do not evaluate a company differently, after being confronted with an emotional CSR message, a rational CSR message or a CSR message that combines emotional and rational elements.
Hypothesis 2
In order to test whether consumers evaluate a company most positively after being confronted with a palm oil-related CSR message that combines both rational and emotional elements (H2), a one-way ANOVA was performed. Again, company evaluation was
measured on the same 7-point Likert scale. The one-way ANOVA compared the company evaluation among the three experimental groups that were confronted with either an emotional (M=5.32), a rational (M=5.24), or a combined message (M=5.24).There was no significant difference found (F(2, 146)=.174, p=.84). The result suggests that consumers do not evaluate a company differently after being confronted with a palm oil-related CSR message that is framed either emotionally, rationally, or combined emotional and rational. Hypothesis 3
To measure whether consumers evaluate a company more positively after being confronted with a rational palm related CSR message than after an emotional palm oil-related CSR message (H3), a t-test was performed in order to see whether the groups differ from each other significantly. Again, company evaluation was measured through a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (extremely negative) to 7 (extremely positive). There was no significant difference found between the group that was confronted with an emotional message (M=5.32, SD=.80) and the group that was confronted with a rational message (M=5.24, SD=.84), t(99)=.50, p=.61. Thus, according to this test result, consumers do not evaluate a company differently after being confronted with an emotionally framed message or a rationally framed message.
Hypothesis 4
H4 expected knowledge of the palm oil issue to play a moderating role in the
relationship between being confronted with a palm oil-related CSR issue that was framed in a certain way, and consumers evaluation of the company as given in H2 and H3. As the test results of H2 and H3 were found to not be significant, a moderation analysis would not be significant and therefore unnecessary to perform (see appendix C). This indicates that
knowledge of the palm oil issue does not have a moderating effect on the relationship between the palm oil-related CSR message frame and consumers' evaluation of the company.
22
Therefore H4a and H4b are rejected.
An additional t-test was performed to check for a direct relationship between
knowledge of the palm oil issue and company evaluation. Company evaluation was measured on the same 7-point Likert scale. Knowledge of the palm oil issue was measured on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (very little knowledge) to 7 (very knowledgeable). Therefore, palm oil knowledge had to be recoded into two categories (low knowledge and high knowledge) first, to test if the two groups differed from each other significantly. There was no significant difference found between consumers with low knowledge of the palm oil issue (M=5.36, SD=.65) and consumers with high knowledge of the palm oil issue (M=5.21, SD=.98), in their evaluation of the company t(119)=.99, p=.85. This indicates that the consumers that are more knowledgeable of the palm oil issue and those that are less knowledgeable of it, do not evaluate a company differently from each other.
Discussion and Limitations
This study aimed to examine how consumers evaluate a company, depending on the type of palm oil-related CSR message frame they were confronted with, and how knowledge of the palm oil issue would affect this relationship. The assumption was that being confronted with a specific CSR message frame concerning the palm oil issue, would affect consumers'
evaluation of a company. It was also assumed that consumer knowledge of the palm oil issue would moderate this relationship in such manner that more knowledgeable consumers would be affected less by the message they were confronted with, than consumers with less
knowledge about the issue, and vice versa.
The results of H1were not significant, therefore the first hypothesis was not confirmed. H1 expected consumers to evaluate a company more positively after being confronted with its palm oil-related CSR message, than when not being confronted with any CSR message. Consumers' associations with a company's CSR have demonstrated to influence their evaluation of the company (Brown & Dacin, 1997). However, in the current study no relationship between a company's CSR and consumers' company evaluation was found.
H2 was also rejected. H2 expected consumers toevaluate a company most positively after being confronted with a CSR message concerning the palm oil issue that was framed by combining both rational and emotional elements. For this hypothesis we built upon Buden and Connett (2016), who demonstrated that consumers can evaluate a combined rational and
23
emotional company message as most trustworthy after being confronted with it, as opposed to a merely rational or merely emotional message. As consumers' trust is considered as an aspect of company evaluation (Marin & Ruiz, 2007), we expected the outcomes on company
evaluation to be similar. A possible explanation for the different outcomes is the fact that Buden and Connett (2016) performed their research in a qualitative setting. Therefore, the different outcomes might be due to the quantitative nature of the current study.
The third hypothesis was not confirmed either. H3 expected consumers to evaluate a company more positively after being confronted with a rationally framed CSR message concerning the palm oil issue, than after being confronted with an emotionally framed CSR message concerning the palm oil issue. Andreu et al. (2015) demonstrated that rational CSR messages can communicate environment-related CSR, such as the palm oil issue, more effectively than emotional frames do. The outcomes of H2 were not significant, which suggests that consumers that are confronted with a message frame of either rational or emotional nature, did not evaluate the company differently.
Hypothesis 4 was rejected. According to H4, consumers with more knowledge of the palm oil issue were expected to be affected less by the message frame they were confronted with, and consumers with less knowledge of the palm oil issue, were expected to be affected more by the message frame they are confronted with. However, because knowledge of the palm oil issue moderated H2 and H3, which were rejected, the moderating effect was not tested. As knowledge of a CSR issue in the past has proven to lead to greater support of the issue by consumers (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004), we performed an additional analysis to test for a direct effect. This had to be rejected as well. However, most studies we relied on to support this hypothesis are older (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004; Sen & Batthacharya, 2001), which could explain the outcomes of H4 in this specific research.
Overall, the main explanation for the non significant outcomes in this study is the fact that the manipulation failed. Thus, respondents did not recognize the different CSR messages as being either mainly emotional, mainly rational or a combined version of the two.
Another possible explanation for the results concern the company that was used in this study: Nutella, which is very well known worldwide. As Pfau et al. (2008) demonstrated that CSR campaigns of companies that have a positive image to begin with, can make people's perception of a company's image, reputation and credibility better. Consumers' prior existing schema's and idea's of other natures might also have affected the company evaluation in this study. This could have affected the way consumers evaluated the company and weakened the effect of the CSR palm oil message.
24
Another possible overall explanation is the context in which the research took place. Steltenpool and Verhoeven (2015) already demonstrated that CSR message frames affect consumers in different industries differently. This explains the unexpected outcomes in the context of the palm oil issue. Additionally, the fact that the palm oil issue in the Netherlands possibly received relatively little media attention compared to other countries, and the majority of the sample was Dutch, could imply low involvement in the issue among respondents. As the explanation for rational CSR messages to communicate environment-related CSR more effectively is due to expected higher involvement in environmental issues (Andreu et al., 2015), low involvement among respondents could be an explanation for these non significant findings as well.
Another explanation has to do with the sample characteristics. The current research did present some limitations with regard to the sample. For one, the sample was not collected randomly but by convenience, and with use of the snowball method. Additionally, the sample was not very large, consisted of a majority of Dutch respondents (69.8%), and was mainly female (68.9%). This limits the generalizability of the population. It is possible that the same study in a different country, or with a sample that contained more males, would have had different outcomes. Furthermore, on average the respondents did not consider themselves to be knowledgeable of the palm oil issue, nor did they find themselves to have little knowledge. A more diverse group of respondents with regard to knowledge of the palm oil issue might have given us different outcomes. Moreover, despite limited consumer knowledge about the palm oil issue, generally, consumer knowledge of the ethicalness of products might have improved lately. Where in the early 00's consumers had little knowledge about the ethicalness of their purchases (Augur et al., 2003), nowadays consumers have become more conscious of ethical consumerism (Baker, 2015).
Another limitation concerns the CSR palm oil texts that were used as stimulus material. As the messages were quite long, they might have been too long for respondents to read them entirely carefully. Furthermore, the nature of the CSR palm oil messages may have played a role. For some participants, they may have been too difficult or not appealing
enough. Additionally, as most respondents were non-native English speakers, and we have no insights in their English language skills, the texts and the questions might have been too challenging with regard to the use of language and the level. These concerns seem to be confirmed in the results of the manipulation check, as respondents failed to recognize the nature of the text. This might have compromised the internal validity of the study.
25
subjective knowledge. Thus, no objective measure of palm oil knowledge among consumers was used. Consequently, respondents may have estimated their own knowledge of the palm oil issue higher or lower than an objective measure would have indicated.
Future research
Deriving from the discussion points and limitations of this research, recommendations for future research are made here. Future studies would benefit from a larger, more
representative sample that is randomly selected. With regard to stimulus materials, scholars are recommended to use concise, clear, and not too challenging texts in future research. We also recommend scholars to carefully consider the nature and the possible effects of using either an existing company or a fictitious company in future studies, as both might affect research outcomes differently. It would be interesting to see the results of this study with a different example company. Additionally, future research that incorporates knowledge of the palm oil issue would benefit from the development of an objective measure for palm oil knowledge, rather than use a subjective measure of self-assessed knowledge.
Furthermore, research could benefit from more studies in the context of specific societal issues, as is the palm oil issue. Namely, the outcomes in other sectors could differ from each other (Steltenpool & Verhoeven, 2015), as well as from research that studies CSR in a more general manner. Within the context of the palm oil issue, it would be interesting to investigate the effects of using other types of frames in CSR messages. Additionally, besides the effects on company evaluation, effects on other concepts, such as brand attitude or purchase intention, would also contribute.
Despite the fact that the findings of the study were not significant, they did tell us more about CSR communication in the specific context of the palm oil issue. The fact that emotional, rational and combined frames in CSR messages had no effects on company evaluation in the context of the palm oil issue, tells us to look in other directions. Companies in the palm oil industry would, according to these findings, not benefit from applying either of these frames to their CSR messages. However, other types of frames might be beneficial for consumers' company evaluation in this context.
Besides framing theory, it would be interesting to look for support in other theories, such as the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). The ELM could explain more about the way consumers process information from the CSR messages they are confronted with.
26
The ELM by Petty and Cacioppo (1986) assumes two routes through which attitudes are formed and consumers can be persuaded: the central route and the peripheral route. People's motivation or ability to process information from a message determines through which route the consumer might be persuaded. When persuaded through the central route, people have more opportunity or motivation to cognitively process the message they are confronted with (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). According to Andreu et al. (2015), a rational CSR message
communicated environmental issues more effectively because of consumers' higher cognitive involvement, which could be compared to information processing through the central route. Furthermore, according Petty and Cacioppo (1986), when people have less motivation or opportunity to cognitively process a message, an attempt to persuade follows the peripheral route. Following this route, other signals might cause an attitudinal change without the
consumer having to put in much effort to cognitively process the argued information from the message. These signals can for example relate back to survival cues, such as fear and hunger (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). The latter could be compared to the emotional appeal, which does not require a lot of emotional processing, but rather focuses on emotional, intangible, and subjective elements (Liu & Stout, 1987).
27 References
5-minute info – palm oil (n.d.). Retrieved from: https://www.rainforest-rescue.org/topics/palm-oil#start
Alva group (2016, April 7). Corporate sustainability initiatives: how can a communication gap harm reputation? Retrieved from: http://www.alva-group.com/en/corporate-sustainability-initiatives-can-communication-gap-harm-reputation/
Andreu, L., Casado-Díaz, A. B., & Mattila, A. S. (2015). Effects of message appeal and service type in CSR communication strategies. Journal of Business Research, 68(7), 1488-1495. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.039
Auger, P., Burke, P., Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. (2003). What will consumers pay for social product features?. Journal of business ethics, 42(3), 281-304. doi: 10.1023/ A:1022212816261
Baker, J. (2015, April 2). The rise of the conscious consumer: why businesses need to open up. Retrieved from:
https://www.theguardian.com/women-in- leadership/2015/apr/02/the-rise-of-the-conscious-consumer-why-businesses-need-to-open-up
Bhattacharya, C.B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: when, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47, pp. 9–24. doi: 10.2307/41166284
Bhattacharya, C. B., Rao, H. and Glynn, M. A. (1995). Understanding the Bond of
Identification: An Investigation of Its Correlates Art Museum Members, Journal of Marketing 59(4), 46–57. doi: 0.2307/1252327
Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. The Journal of Marketing, 68-84. doi: 10.2307/ 1252190
Buden, I., & Connett, L. (2016). Consumer reactions to different forms of CSR communication.
Brussels, M.P. (2016, March 2). The odd couple: RSPO members and ‘no palm oil’ label. Retrieved from: http://palmoiltoday.net/the-odd-couple-rspo-members-and-no-palm-oil-label/
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business horizons, 34(4), 39-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G
28
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review Political Science, 10, 103-126.
Consumption of vegetable oils worldwide from 2012/13 to 2016/2017, by oil type (in million metric tons), (n.d.). Retrieved from:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/263937/vegetable-oils-global-consumption/ Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37
definitions. Corporate social responsibility and environmental management, 15(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1002/csr.132
Disdier, A. C., Marette, S., & Millet, G. (2013). Are consumers concerned about palm oil? Evidence from a lab experiment. Food Policy, 43, 180-189. doi: 10.1016/
j.foodpol.2013.09.003
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x
Entman, R. M. (1991). Symposium framing US coverage of international news: Contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran air incidents. Journal of communication, 41(4), 6-27. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1991.tb02328.x
Europe-Economics. (2014, October 15). The Economic Impact of Palm Oil Imports in the EU. Retrieved from: http://www.europeeconomics.com/publications/europe_economics_-_economic_impact_of_palm_oil_imports.pdf
Flynn, L. R., & Goldsmith, R. E. (1999). A short, reliable measure of subjective knowledge. Journal of business research, 46(1), 57-66. doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(98)00057-5
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of consumer research, 21(1), 1-31. doi: 10.1086/209380 Garcia, M. M., & Greenwood, K. (2015). Visualizing CSR: A visual framing analysis of US
multinational companies. Journal of Marketing Communications, 21(3), 167-184. doi: 10.1080/13527266.2012.740064
Greenpeace (2011, September 13). 2010 - Nestlé stops purchasing rainforest-destroying palm oil. Retrieved from: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/about/history/
29
Hertog, J. K., & McLeod, D. M. (2001). A multiperspectival approach to framing analysis: A field guide. In Reese, S. D. Gandy, J. O. H. and Grant, A. E. (eds.) Framing public life:Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. New Jersey: Routledge, 139-161.
IBM Corp. Released 2013. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
Impacts (n.d.). Retrieved from: https://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/palm-oil
Karaosman, H., Morales-Alonso, G., & Grijalvo, M. (2015). Consumers’ responses to CSR in a cross-cultural setting. Cogent Business & Management, 2(1), 1052916. doi: 10.1080 /23311975.2015.1052916
Kim, Y. (2014). Strategic communication of corporate social responsibility (CSR): Effects of stated motives and corporate reputation on stakeholder responses. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 838-840. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.07.005
Lee, S. Y., & Carroll, C. E. (2011). The emergence, variation, and evolution of corporate social responsibility in the public sphere, 1980–2004: The exposure of firms to public debate. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(1), 115-131. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-0893-y Liu, S. S., & Stout, P. A. (1987). Effects of message modality and appeal on advertising
acceptance. Psychology & Marketing, 4(3), 167-187. doi: 10.1002/mar.4220040303 Lunenberg, K., Gosselt, J. F., & De Jong, M. D. (2016). Framing CSR fit: How corporate
social responsibility activities are covered by news media. Public relations review, 42(5), 943-951. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.11.016
Marin, L., & Ruiz, S. (2007). “I need you too!” Corporate identity attractiveness for
consumers and the role of social responsibility. Journal of business ethics, 71(3), 245-260. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9137-y
Matthes, J. (2009). What's in a frame? A content analysis of media framing studies in the world's leading communication journals, 1990-2005. Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly, 86(2), 349-367. doi: 10.1177/107769900908600206 Menon, S., & Kahn, B. E. (2003). Corporate sponsorships of philanthropic activities: when do
they impact perception of sponsor brand?. Journal of consumer psychology, 13(3), 316-327. doi: 10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_12
Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer affairs, 35(1), 45-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.
30
2001.tb00102.x
Nijkrake, J., Gosselt, J. F., & Gutteling, J. M. (2015). Competing frames and tone in corporate communication versus media coverage during a crisis. Public relations review, 41(1), 80-88. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.10.010
Palm oil production (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://www.palmoilandfood.eu/en/palm-oil-production
Palm oil uses (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://www.palmoilandfood.eu/en/palm-oil-uses Paoli, G. D., Yaap, B., Wells, P. L., & Sileuw, A. (2010). CSR, oil palm and the RSPO:
Translating boardroom philosophy into conservation action on the ground. Tropical Conservation Science, 3(4), 438-446. doi: 10.1177/194008291000300408
Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. (2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of business ethics, 102(1), 15. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-0901-2
Pawlak, M., & Zasuwa, G. (2011). Influence of a company's social initiatives on the consumer attitude towards it: Results of experimental research. doi:
https://ssrn.com/abstract=2165798
Petty, R.E. & Cacioppo, J.T. (1986) The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in experimental social psychology, 19, 1-24. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2
Pfau, M., Haigh, M. M., Sims, J., & Wigley, S. (2008). The influence of corporate social responsibility campaigns on public opinion. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(2), 145-154. doi: 10.1057/crr.2008.14
Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of communication, 57(1), 9-20. doi: 10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x
Schultz, F., Castelló, I., & Morsing, M. (2013). The construction of corporate social responsibility in network societies: A communication view. Journal of business ethics, 115(4), 681-692. doi: 10.1007/s10551-013-1826-8
Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of marketing Research, 38(2), 225-243. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838
